Jeb Bush, as dumb as his idiot brother: His latest nonsense should have you … | us news

Jeb Bush, as dumb as his idiot brother: His latest nonsense should have you …

28 Sep 2015 | Author: | No comments yet »

As governor, Bush sided with campaign contributor on delaying Everglades pollution cleanup.

One of the most entertaining spectacles of this election cycle is watching Jeb! Jeb Bush’s tax cut plan would cost the government $3.4 trillion in lost revenue with 53 percent of the benefits going to the richest one percent of the population.At a campaign event in South Carolina on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush was asked how he planned to include black people in his campaign and get them to vote for him. Bush try to marry his genial, moderate patrician demeanor to the kind of sneering, condescending Tea Party dialogue that, having incubated for years in right-wing media, has now burst out of the host Republican Party’s abdominal cavity to spray acid in the eyes of anyone who dares get near it. Whether it was his call for “phasing out” Medicare, or his scorn for women’s health issues, or his claim that Asians are the real anchor babies, he’s got a serious case of foot-in-mouth disease.

He can point to his record while governor of rolling back Florida environmental regulations — although one rollback in particular brought him sharp criticism from politicians from his own party. People’s attitudes change, the prevailing political sentiment changes, and suddenly you have to police every single word you say to deny fodder for the traveling press corps and the army of gaffe-hungry video trackers stalking your every movement.

Now he’s out with a fresh clunker, this time about how Republicans, unlike Democrats, won’t try to lure black voters with “free stuff.” Primary voting is months away, and already Bush is flirting with language that may have lost Mitt Romney the election. Bush followed up his recent “hey black people, no more free stuff for you!” moment by sitting for an interview with John Harwood on CNBC, and hoo boy, does the former Florida governor sound like a man so far down the rabbit hole he might emerge on the other side of the planet. Bush’s argument — that Democrats cynically use welfare to buy black votes and thereby trap them in a cycle of dependency — is seriously mistaken, as well as deeply hypocritical. I’m confident I can win New Hampshire.” Bush also defended his remarks last week about Democratic and Republican candidates competing for the black vote, comments that have been compared to those made in 2012 by GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney after his loss. “Our message is one of hope and aspiration,” Bush, a favorite among the Republican establishment, said Thursday in early-voting state South Carolina. “It isn’t one of division and ‘Get in line and we’ll take care of you with free stuff.’ ” “To the contrary,” Bush said. “I think we need to make our case to African-American voters and all voters that an aspirational message, fixing a few big complex things, will allow people to rise up.

And it benefited Florida’s sugar industry, now a major donor to his Right to Rise Super PAC. “The sugar industry owns everybody in Tallahassee, and it doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican,” said veteran Audubon of Florida activist Charles Lee. “I can’t blame Jeb any more than all the other governors and legislative leaders who have buckled under sugar’s pressure over the years.” During Bush’s eight years as governor, he left a distinctive mark on several environmental programs. Over the course of just a few minutes, he manages to twist himself into so many knots trying to rescue his brother’s legacy while simultaneously suggesting that President Obama is several steps to the left of Vladimir Lenin, by the end you could salt him and sell him from a Times Square pretzel cart. Rather than pointing to the 53 percent fact, Wallace inquired about the fact that a middle class family will see a 2.9 percent increase in after-tax income while a rich family will see an 11.6 percent increase. Not only is there a supreme irony in this racial condescension that casts black people, whose free labor helped establish the prosperity of this country and who were systematically excluded from the full benefits of that prosperity for generations, as leeches only desirous of “free stuff,” this line of reasoning also infantilizes black thought and consciousness and presents an I-know-best-what-ails-you paternalism about black progress. Take this answer to Harwood’s question about why the country has seen more economic growth when Democrats have held the White House versus Republicans over the last 35 years.

It echoes the trope about lazy “welfare queens,” although as a report last year from the Congressional Research Service makes clear: “Historically, nonwhite women had a higher labor force participation rate than did white women. This especially held true for married women.” Furthermore, although blacks are disproportionately the recipients of programs likes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, a 2013 report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that most households with at least one working-age, non-disabled adult receiving the benefit work, and of those with families, “almost 90 percent work in the prior or subsequent year.” The problem isn’t refusal to work, but inability to find work that is stable and pays a living wage, thereby pushing them out of need and eligibility. That was my whole point.” He argued that the average American family’s disposable income has declined by thousands of dollars and that 6 million more Americans are in poverty since President Obama was elected in 2007, while the federal government continues to spend trillions of dollars annually on poverty programs. “We should try something different, which is to give people the capacity to achieve earned success, fix our schools, fix our economy, lessen the crime rates in the big urban areas and I think people in poverty could be lifted up,” Bush told Fox. Consider the basic tax bracket table for a single filer (the same general considerations apply to other kinds of households but the details differ) and you can see what Bush is getting wrong: What would happen is that every single person with a taxable income of at least $9,225 would pay $922.50 less in taxes than they currently do. Bush’s comment also hints at the role of black men without acknowledging the disastrous toll racially skewed patterns of mass incarceration have taken on the fortunes of black families by disproportionately ensnaring black men.

He also said he disagrees with some congressional Republicans’ idea of shutting down the government this week by not agreeing to a spending bill that includes funding for Planned Parenthood. The PAYGO budget compromise, where there was an increase in taxes, but there was, more importantly, a rule that every dollar of additional spending required a cut in spending, was very effective in restraining government during the Clinton era, as well. There’s also the noticeable incongruence of a presidential candidate with two former presidents in his immediate family evangelizing the need for black voters and others to make their own success in life. All history and context are cast aside in support of a specious argument: That the black community is plagued by pathological dependence and a chronic, self-defeating posture of victimization. He also backed the efforts of House Speaker John Boehner, who resigned last week, saying he “admired” him and that he will be missed “in the long run.”

The program, originally expected to take 20 years and cost $8.7 billion, mapped out a way to re-plumb the fading River of Grass with a system of pumps, levees, canals and wells that would make its flow mimic its original one. But middle class families and rich families would get the exact same cut — an extra $76 bucks a month that rich people probably wouldn’t notice but that more strapped families might find very helpful. Bush had raised it from 28 to 31 percent in 1990) got lucky by taking advantage of…Ronald Reagan’s tax reforms that lowered the top rate to 28 percent in the first place? In Bush’s book written two decades ago, “Profiles in Character,” he wrote: “Since the 1960s, the politics of victimization has steadily intensified.

That means he cuts the rates that everyone pays, and he cuts the rates that middle class and rich people both pay, but then he also adds on extra bonus rate cuts that exclusively benefit high-income households. On Dec. 11, 2000, Bush stood next to then-President Bill Clinton as Clinton signed Everglades restoration into law. “He sensed that it was legacy stuff,” explained Allison DeFoor, a former Monroe County judge who served as Bush’s so-called Everglades czar. “If you’re from South Florida, you sense that (the Everglades) ties everything together — the environment, the economy, water, farming, jobs, you name it. … He really cared.” Bush’s Everglades success “is evidence it is possible to manage restoration of this national treasure in a fiscally sound way,” presidential campaign spokeswoman Kristy Campbell said, and shows how he’ll tackle similar problems as president. If I’m a lower income voter of any race and I hear Jeb Bush extolling “earned success” and lambasting the notion of government handouts for people like me while he’s rewriting the tax code to send several hundred billion dollars to himself and his country club pals, I’d be inclined to think he’s full of shit.

Many of the modern victim movements — the gay rights movement, the feminist movement, the black empowerment movement — have attempted to get people to view themselves as part of a smaller group deserving of something from society. Sugar and Flo-Sun had also been major contributors to both Bush’s Foundation for Florida’s Future and to the Republican Party of Florida, which bankrolled Bush’s successful 1998 campaign. This is standard-issue Republican tax policy, but other Republicans are a bit smoother when it comes to squaring the nakedly regressive quality of their tax proposals with their professed concern for the little guy. At his 100th birthday party in 2002, then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) praised Thurmond’s 1948 run for president under a third party apartheid ticket. (Lott later resigned as leader after his comments were made public.) Democrats have not been the finest stewards of black fortunes, but it’s pretty obvious that they’re better than the alternative.

It is a major deviation from the society envisioned by Martin Luther King, who would have had people judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin — or sexual preference or gender or ethnicity.” Not only does this completely ignore the historical and structural effect of America’s endemic anti-black racism, it also misinterprets King’s own understanding of this phenomenon. Marco Rubio, for example, has offered tax plan that would represent a massive giveaway to the country’s wealthiest people – taxes on their incomes would be cut, and taxes on their investments and estates would be eliminated. Runoff from sugar farms has long contained too much phosphorous, wiping out the sawgrass and spreading cattails, which are all wrong for the wildlife found in the Everglades. While Democrats support social benefits in a wishy-washy way, conservatives are absolutely obsessed with directing huge monetary benefits to their favored constituencies — namely, the rich. And considering that domestic programs have been cut to the bone during the wild budget battles of the Obama era, can Bush name what he’ll cut in order to lower tax rates and keep the deficit down?

But Rubio argues that this massive subsidy for rich people will help the middle class because the wealthy will invest it and create jobs like the one his immigrant father held down as a young man. He blasted “large segments of white society” for being “more concerned about tranquillity and the status quo than about justice, equality, and humanity.” He slammed what he calls the “white backlash” for being the cause of black discontent and shouts for Black Power, rather than the result of it, calling it “merely a new name for an old phenomenon.” And he declared that true integration “is not merely a romantic or aesthetic something where you merely add color to a still predominantly white power structure.” You see, King wasn’t naïvely oblivious to structural racism and how it cloistered power and inhibited mobility and equality; he was acutely aware of it and adamantly opposed to it.

In 2003, the industry deployed more than 40 lobbyists in Tallahassee to push a bill — unveiled halfway through the session — that said the water didn’t need to be clean by then. If you’re going to expand another entitlement, like Obamacare or part D of Medicare, there should be some consistent plan to pay for them because we do have a structural deficit, and it’s serious.

He’s telling voters that while he and the rest of the top tax quintile legislate themselves a massive tax windfall, the layabouts at the bottom of the ladder will get an encouraging pat on the butt and a cheerful, firm reminder that those bootstraps aren’t going to pull themselves up. It also used language such as “to the maximum extent practicable” and “earliest practicable date.” The industry’s goal: push the cleanup deadline back to 2026. It became a steamroller that no environmental group could stop, no matter how often they called it the “Everglades Whenever Act.” (Among the House members who voted for it: future U.S. Meanwhile, what passes for new policy in Republican circles — a child tax credit — is a government benefit for middle- and upper-class parents that carefully and deliberately excludes the poor. Good government types often rail against the blatant cronyism of Bush family politics — i.e., you give me hundreds of millions of dollars for my presidential campaign, and I’ll cut the capital gains tax so you can better loot your company — but making good policy isn’t as simple as being against patronage in general.

As Francis Fukuyama points out in Political Order and Political Decay, Boss Tweed-style patronage politics can also be a first step towards an efficient, decent modern state. When he testified in favor of the delay at a committee hearing, a Times reporter pursued him through the Capitol seeking an explanation of his reversal.

There is no bright line between handing out jobs to one’s ethnic community in return for votes, and constructing a modern bureaucracy that provides universal social benefits like clean air and water, low crime, a safety net, and so forth. Cornered at last, Struhs blamed his flip-flop on what he called “political reality.” Influential Republicans in Congress, such as Appropriations Committee chairman C.W. The military, to defend the nation; Social Security, to provide for the retired and disabled; Medicare, Medicaid, and ObamaCare, to provide universal access to health care; various safety net programs like food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit, to keep people from destitution — these together, plus interest on the national debt, account for 84 percent of direct federal spending. Other nations with better versions of similar policies show that universal high-quality health care and an end to poverty are easily within our grasp.

So the problem with Bush’s logrolling — and Republican policy in general — is mainly that it directs almost all the benefits to people who don’t need it. District Judge William Hoeveler wrote that he was “deeply troubled” by the bill and dismayed it was passed so quickly that it “seemed calculated to avoid federal participation or public scrutiny.” In a subsequent interview the judge told the Times Bush was “a good man” but “I’m afraid he fell into the hands of those who don’t like the Everglades.” When he finally signed it into law — behind closed doors, outside public scrutiny — Bush called the bill “strong legislation built on good policy.” U.S.

I would love to see polls on this question that sample the sorts of people who don’t attend Federalist Society dinners or spend all of their free time on Daily Caller comments threads: Barack Obama is as hostile to capitalism as he is to Portuguese Water Dogs. Sugar spokeswoman Judy Sanchez said last week that the 2003 law “has been a landmark success” because the amount of phosphorus flowing off the industry’s land has been cut every year. In 2012 he cut a deal with the Environmental Protection Agency to spend $880 million on filter marshes and other structures to clean up the phosphorus. Didn’t our nation’s lineup of robber barons and plutocrats just find $100 million in change in their couch cushions to throw at Bush for his campaign?

Twitter-news
Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

About this site